Jump to content

Noctilux f/1 vs f/1.2 (re-edition)


alainD

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm fortunate enough to have both. I decided to make a comparison between the two on a tripod, using 2s self timer, re-focusing with magnified live view between at each shot.
I shot f/1, f/1.2, f1/.4, f/2 on the former and f/1.2, f1/.4, f/2 on the later. To spice things up a bit, I also added a shot with the APO Summicron at f/2...

Results here:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/sv9nxtow2nmot8j/AACmXe6NW1IxVMfmLLP53-k7a?dl=0

First thing I noticed was the slightly different focal length between all three lenses. I'm curious what people here think.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for this comparison which focuses on sharpness. The result is not much of a surprise. The 50 APO runs completely out of competition, a comparison with the two Noctiluxes makes no sense to me. If there is anybody expecting sharpness and microcontrast from an old or older Noctilux wide open, then he`s on the wrong path. When it comes to older lenses, then the look and feel is of major importance. This is what you don`t get with modern lenses.

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

As an owner of the 50/1.0 Noctilux #11822, I am glad to have the comparison that @alainD has put together.  I have been wondering how my Noctilux would compare to the new f/1.2 version. 

I tend to think of my version of the Noctilux as a special purpose lens, one that I would use exclusively to produce a specific body of work.  To mix images made with it in an exhibit made with the sharp, contrasty Karbe designed lenses might not be the best idea, given the very different fingerprint the modern Karbe lenses produce.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have added a few pictures: some self portraits with both Noctiluxes, at f/1.0, f/1.2 and f/1.4.

They are in the same dropbox link I sent earlier:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/sv9nxtow2nmot8j/AACmXe6NW1IxVMfmLLP53-k7a?dl=0

Because those are NOT on a tripod, focusing is more challenging.

Alain

ps: I forgot to mention: DNG processed in Lightroom, simple exposition matching and toning in Silverefex. No other editing.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I tried to focus on the markings on the front of the lens, not me... Not easy hand held! The goal was to see how the lens would render the out of focus zone on my face.

Note: the 50 f/1 is longer by one centimeter (0.4 inches) than the f/1.2, which make my face appear more out of focus on the shots with the f/1.

Alain

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, darylgo said:

Can you summarize what you're seeing?  

Well, so far both lenses are fairly similar, which is not surprising. Differences are in the details:

- The f1.2 "reedition" is a lot smaller, lighter and much easier to use for daily operation
- The f1.2 "reedition" is a fair bit more controlled... The "double" image in the slightly out-of-focus areas is mostly gone
- The f1.2 "reedition" seems to show more contrast. At least on some of the shots.
- The f1 is noticeably sharper, even at f/1.0 than the f1.2 at f/1.2. Of course, that is, if you nail the focus.
- At similar aperture, the out-of-focus areas (beside the double image point mentioned above) look similar in both lenses.
- On the f1, I was surprised to see the depth of field at f/1.0 to be so much narrower than at f/1.2! It really shows, and the background looks very different.

I still need to do more controlled tests in color. First pictures were showing the f1 with 1970's vintage color, on the cold side. The f1.2 "reedition" colors were more modern, more saturated (but not APO Summicron saturated), warmer and very pleasant (at least to me).

My conclusion: if I decide to keep both lenses, I'll probably end up using the f1 on the M10 monochrome and the f/1.2 on the SL2.

Hope this helps!

Alain

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Two more self portraits, with the focus now on my eyes. Processed to add contrast. Identical process on both.

First picture is with the f1, second with the f1.2 (re-edition)

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited by alainD
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

As promised, here are 3 pictures to show the variation in color of the 3 lenses: Noctilux f1, Noctilux f1.2 (reedition) and APO Summicron.
They appear to confirm my earlier findings that the f1 has colder colors, and the f1.2 (reedition) has color approaching the APO.

Noctilux f1

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!


 
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Noctilux f1.2 (re-edition)

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!


 
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

APO Summicron:

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, alainD said:

Well, so far both lenses are fairly similar, which is not surprising. Differences are in the details:

- The f1.2 "reedition" is a lot smaller, lighter and much easier to use for daily operation
- The f1.2 "reedition" is a fair bit more controlled... The "double" image in the slightly out-of-focus areas is mostly gone
- The f1.2 "reedition" seems to show more contrast. At least on some of the shots.
- The f1 is noticeably sharper, even at f/1.0 than the f1.2 at f/1.2. Of course, that is, if you nail the focus.
- At similar aperture, the out-of-focus areas (beside the double image point mentioned above) look similar in both lenses.
- On the f1, I was surprised to see the depth of field at f/1.0 to be so much narrower than at f/1.2! It really shows, and the background looks very different.

I still need to do more controlled tests in color. First pictures were showing the f1 with 1970's vintage color, on the cold side. The f1.2 "reedition" colors were more modern, more saturated (but not APO Summicron saturated), warmer and very pleasant (at least to me).

My conclusion: if I decide to keep both lenses, I'll probably end up using the f1 on the M10 monochrome and the f/1.2 on the SL2.

Hope this helps!

Alain

Thank you so much for the time you are investing to share with all of us your first impressions with the new 1.2 Noctilux. I am not that surprised to hear your F1 is noticeably sharper wide open when compared to the new 1.2 as my Dad's original 1.2 is not quite as sharp on center as even my very early E58 F1 Noctilux although I would word them as offering a different kind of sharpness, as the 1.2 has a smoother transition to out of focus and the out of focus does not poses the same amount of uncontrolled aberrations compared to my E58 F1. 

My copy of the new 1.2 arrives today so like you're doing I am eager to perform back to back comparisons with my real hope being the new 1.2 possesses enough of the original lenses beautiful character that differs from my E58 F1. One point I'd like to share is I see your F1 is a V4 and I owned one of these copies as well and my late V4 E60 was sharper on center than my E58 copy and both had been calibrated. The coatings were different as well which made for slightly differing contrast and colors with the V4 F1 providing a more modern look.

May I ask if you are disappointed or happy with what Leica has developed in the new edition of the 1.2 Noctilux?

Edited by insideline
grammer
Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, insideline said:

May I ask if you are disappointed or happy with what Leica has developed in the new edition of the 1.2 Noctilux?

I'm very happy with those Leica re-editions. I've the Summaron-M 28mm, the Thambar-M and now the Noctilux-M f1.2. All three are wonderful.
I do not have the originals of those lenses, but saw a number of pictures posted online. I would say the re-editions did a great job a keeping the
character of the originals while improving a bit in contrast and color. I would think modern type of glass and coating plays a big role!

Alain

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, alainD said:

I'm very happy with those Leica re-editions. I've the Summaron-M 28mm, the Thambar-M and now the Noctilux-M f1.2. All three are wonderful.
I do not have the originals of those lenses, but saw a number of pictures posted online. I would say the re-editions did a great job a keeping the
character of the originals while improving a bit in contrast and color. I would think modern type of glass and coating plays a big role!

Alain

Thank you very much for the time you’ve taken to do comparisons. The shots you’ve taken with the M10 Monochrom all seem a bit soft, including the 50 APO, so I must be losing something in compression and viewing. Oddly enough, your color examples do not exhibit the same problem on all 3 lenses.

I got a bit lucky and a Noctilux 1.2 is currently on its way to me (believe me, it was luck, I have no pull with anybody...) and I look forward to it. I had been a little wary from internet picture postings that all appear a bit muddled. Unfortunately I just sent my M10-R back to Leica, the rangefinder seems to have fallen slightly out of whack. But I’ll put the Noctilux on my SL2 and see if its a keeper.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great thread, thanks!

A bit surprising that the f/1 looks sharper wide open than the re-editioned f/1.2, considering the half stop advantage and newer coatings.

I have a 1975 version of the f/1, and for any practical purpose, it is just as sharp as a Summicron-M on axis from f/2.8.
If anything, this re-edition should make the older f/1's more desirable - if you absolutely must have all that speed.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, lefse said:

Great thread, thanks!

A bit surprising that the f/1 looks sharper wide open than the re-editioned f/1.2, considering the half stop advantage and newer coatings.

I have a 1975 version of the f/1, and for any practical purpose, it is just as sharp as a Summicron-M on axis from f/2.8.
If anything, this re-edition should make the older f/1's more desirable - if you absolutely must have all that speed.

No kidding! The 1.2 looks like someone put their greasy fingers all over the rear element. I might be returning to the f1. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...